Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/316/2013

K.V.S.Prasad - Complainant(s)

Versus

Standard Chartered Bank - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.R.Dhanalakshmi

06 Aug 2019

ORDER

                                                                  Complaint presented on : 04.01.2013

                                                                    Date of Disposal            : 06.08.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.316/2013

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 06^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019

                                 

Dr. K.V.S. Prasad,

S/o. Sri. Venkateswarlu,

No.42/31, 7^th Cross Street,

Shenoy Nagar,

Chennai – 600 030.                                                        .. Complainant.                                

 

                                                                                             ..Versus..

 

The Manager,

Standard Chartered Bank,

No.187, 2^nd & 3^rd Floors,

Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 006.                                                    ..  Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainant      : M/s. R. Dhanalakshmi

Counsel for the opposite party  : M/s. R & P Partners

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to pay a sum of Rs.19,50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and defamation suffered by the complainant and cost of Rs.5,000/-.

 

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

        The complainant submits that he is Senior Super Speciality Doctor having highest Super Speciality Medical Qualification in the world; practicing Super Speciality in Gastroenterology (Digestion & Liver) at Chennai.  The complainant submits that he availed for a personal loan from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- on 01.03.2006 with Account No.44574258.   The complainant paid the entire loan amount with interest.  The last and final payment of Rs.30,000/- was paid by way of 2 cheques for Rs.15,000/- each dated:23.12.2009 and 23.01.2010. But the CIBIL Consumer Credit Information Report dated:11.01.2012 shows that there is a current balance of Rs.1,08,573/- as an overdue amount of Rs.42,097/- on 31.07.2009.  The said wrong entry given by the opposite party bank proves the negligent act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service.  The complainant submits that several banks approached the complainant and offered various type of loans.   But all of them denied after seeing the CIBIL entry which is a wrong one.   The complainant submits that the said entry caused defame and loss of reputation resulting mental agony.  Hence, the complainant issued legal notice dated:03.08.2012 to the opposite party.  The complainant submits that after availing the loan, there was a default in payment.  The opposite party has come forward for an amicable settlement.  Thereby, the loan was closed by issuance of two cheques.   As a result of the wrong entry with the CIBIL-CIR, the complainant had not only lost his name, fame and prestige but also suffered a lot of mental agony resulting in disturbance of concentration of his work and loss of peace of mind.  All his future plans were shattered. The damages for his suffering are estimated at Rs.19,00,000/- for the damages suffered by the complainant.   The act of the opposite parties 1 & 2 amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.    Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite party states that the complainant availed a personal loan of Rs.3,25,000/- at the rate of 13% p.a. for a period of 48 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8,720/- and agreed to pay the EMI through ECS.   The opposite party states that the complainant is a chronic defaulter in payment of EMI.   Several EMIs were returned unpaid from July 2006 to January 2007, April 2007 to May 2007 and EMI returned as insufficient funds in February 2007.  The complainant made stop payment and thereafter, the account was closed in the month of May 2007.  The non-payment of loan to the opposite party bank caused to levy charges.  The opposite party interacted with the complainant to arrive at a settlement. The settlements are offered for lesser amount against the actual outstanding balance to facilitate the customers to settle the account.  Accordingly, the opposite party Bank contacted the complainant and offered a settlement of Rs.45,000/- against the actual outstanding of Rs.1,08,061.07/-.   The above   said settlement amount have been received in 3 instalments on 27.11.2009, 23.12.2009 and 23.01.2010 which was acknowledged by the complainant himself in the settlement dated:26.11.2009.  The complainant has settled a sum of Rs.45,000/- only to the opposite party.   The complainant had settled his account the status is reflecting as “Settled” with the current balance and the overdue amount as nil.   The above details were even communicated to the complainant by the opposite party on receipt of his legal notice dated:03.02.2012.  The opposite party had given reply dated:22.02.2012 to the Counsel of the complainant.  There has been no wrong entries in the CIBIL report and the complainant has not suffered any damages due to the CIBIL report.   Therefore, the opposite parties submit that at no point of time, there was deficiency in service on their part and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party is filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B5 is marked on the side of the opposite party.

4.      The point for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant entitled a compensation of Rs.19,50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, deformation and deficiency in service as with cost of Rs.5,000/- prayed for?

5.    On point:-

      Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Heard their respective Counsels also.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he is a Senior Super Speciality Doctor having highest Super Speciality Medical Qualification in the world; practicing Super Speciality in Gastroenterology (Digestion & Liver) at Chennai.  Further the contention of the complainant is that he availed for a personal loan from the opposite party for a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- on 01.03.2006 with Account No.44574258.   The complainant paid the entire loan amount with interest.  The last and final payment of Rs.30,000/- was paid by way of 2 cheques for Rs.15,000/- each dated:23.12.2009 and 23.01.2010 as per Ex.A1, copy of receipt. But the CIBIL Consumer Credit Information Report dated:11.01.2012 shows that there is a current balance of Rs.1,08,573/- as an overdue amount of Rs.42,097/- reported on 31.07.2009 as per Ex.A2.  The said wrong entry given by the opposite party bank proves the negligent act of the opposite party which amounts to deficiency in service.  Further the contention of the complainant is that several banks approached the complainant and offered various type of loans.   But all of them denied after seeing the CIBIL entry which is a wrong one.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the said entry caused defame and loss of reputation resulting mental agony.  Hence, the complainant was constrained to file this case after issue of legal notice dated:03.08.2012 as per Ex.A3.  Further the contention of the complainant is that after availing the loan there was a default in payment.  The opposite party has come forward to an amicable settlement.  Thereby, the loan was closed by issuance of two cheques.  The opposite party also admitted that the status of the account reflecting as settled with the current balance and overdue amount as ‘Nil’. The contentions raised by the opposite party that after settling the amount the opposite party has reversed the account and indicating a balance amount of Rs.57,741.17 amounts to unfair trade practice.  Since admittedly as per one-time settlement, the complainant paid the entire amount in accordance with the settlement. 

6.     The learned Counsel for the opposite party would contend that the complainant availed a personal loan of Rs.3,25,000/- at the rate of 13% p.a. for a period of 48 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.8,720/- and agreed to pay the EMI through ECS.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant is a chronic defaulter in payment of EMI.   Several EMIs were returned unpaid from July 2006 to January 2007, April 2007 to May 2007 and EMI returned as insufficient funds in February 2007.  The complainant made stop payment and thereafter, the account was closed in the month of May 2007.  The non-payment of loan to the opposite party bank caused to levy charges.  As per Ex.B3, Personal Loan – Agreement, Clause 2 (d) of the Loan Agreement wherein it has been clearly informed to the complainant:-

        “Without pre-judice to the other rights of the Bank, if the Borrower defaults in making any payment to the Bank, the Borrower shall pay to the Bank an additional interest at the rate of 2.15% p.m. (or at such higher rate as the Bank may specify from time to time) on the entire amount outstanding from the date of default till the date of payment of the entire outstanding amount”.

The opposite party interact with the complainant to arrive at a settlement. The settlements are offered for lesser amount against the actual outstanding balance to facilitate the customers to settle the account.  Accordingly, the opposite party Bank contacted the complainant and offered a settlement of Rs.45,000/- against the actual outstanding of Rs.1,08,061.07/-.   The above   said settlement amount have been received in 3 instalments on 27.11.2009, 23.12.2009 and 23.01.2010 which was acknowledged by the complainant himself in the settlement dated:26.11.2009.  The complainant has settled a sum of Rs.45,000/- to the opposite party also proves that the entire loan was settled. 

7.     Further the contention of the opposite party is that the Credit Information Bureau of India Limited provides the customer repayment information.  Any payment effected towards the loan / card account would be credited to the respective accounts and the status of the account is updated appropriately in the records of the CIBIL.   The opposite party is authorised and mandated to share the true and credit history information of its customers.  But once the loan was settled as per the settlement arrived between the bank and the customers, it is the duty of the opposite party to inform the fact of settlement with the CIBIL authorities.  As per Ex.B4, there is nothing detailed regarding the balance amount which shows the current balance as ‘Zero’ amount over due ‘Zero’. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that that after receiving a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards settlement and the CIBIL status showing credit balance amount overdue Zero return of and settled status settled  keeping the name pending in the CIBIL shall cause great inconvenience and mental agony.  Hence, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.  

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 06^th day of August 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	27.11.2009	Copy of receipt of last and final payment
Ex.A2	11.01.2012	Copy of CIBIL – CIR
Ex.A3	03.08.2012	Copy of legal notice of the complainant to the opposite party

 

OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  

Ex.B1	16.03.2006	Copy of Professional Loan Application form
Ex.B2	11.11.2013	Copy of Statement of Accounts
Ex.B3	14.03.2006	Copy of Loan Agreement
Ex.B4	13.11.2013	Copy of CIBIL Report
Ex.B5	03.02.2012 & 22.02.2012	Copy of legal notice sent by the complainant to the opposite party and response of the opposite party to the complainant

 

 

                              

MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT